LEOPARD ROOFING COMPANY, Inc.
v.
ASPHALT ROOFING INDUSTRY BUREAU et al.
United States District Court E. D. Tennessee, N. D.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
October 5, 1960.
October 5, 1960.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Ambrose, Wilson & Saulpaw, Knoxville, Tenn., C. Arthur Sullivan, Earl Keyes, Jackson, Miss., Arthur John Keefe, Peyton Ford, Ford, Larson, Greene & Horan, Washington, D. C., for plaintiff.
Arthur Medow, Sears, Roebuck and Co., Homan & Arthington, Chicago, Ill., Robert S. Young, Jr., Baker, Young, Young & Baker, Knoxville, Tenn., R. R. Kramer, Franklin J. McVeigh, Kramer, Dye, McNabb & Greenwood, Green, Webb & McCampbell, Knoxville, Tenn., Arthur L. Fisk, Jr., Asst. Gen. Atty., Johns-Manville Corp., New York City, Murray S. Monroe, Taft, Stettinius & Hollister, Cincinnati, Ohio, Malcolm I. Ruddock, Bradley M. Walls, Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft, Victor Futter, Asst. Director Legal Dept., Barrett Div. Allied Chemical Corp., New York City, William J. Speers, Jr., Warner, Stackpole, Stetson & Bradlee, Boston, Mass., Porter R. Chandler, Davis, Polk, Wardwell, Sunderland & Kiendl, New York City, J. H. Doughty, Hodges, Doughty & Carson, Arthur Byrne, Poore, Cox, Baker & McAuley, Knoxville, Tenn., Cyrus Austin, Joseph W. Burns, Austin, Burns, Appell & Smith, New York City, John B. Robinson, Jr., Dallstream, Schiff, Hardin, Waite & Dorschel, Chicago, Ill., John G. Harkins, Jr., Pepper, Hamilton & Scheetz, Philadelphia, Pa., Thomas Kiernan, White & Case, New York City, Robert C. Keck, MacLeish, Spray, Price & Underwood, Chicago, Ill., Anderson & Snepp, Knoxville, Tenn., Lederer, Livingston, Kahn & Adsit, Chicago, Ill., O'Neil, Jarvis, Parker & Williamson, Creekmore & Thomson, Key & Lee, Fowler, Rowntree & Fowler, Taylor & Templeton, Frantz, McConnell & Seymour, Knoxville, Tenn., for defendant.
United States District Court E. D. Tennessee, N. D.
ROBERT L. TAYLOR, District Judge.
Plaintiff has moved to transfer this case pursuant to Title 28 U.S.C. § 1404 (a).1
This Court, by memorandum filed September 28, 1960, ruled that the suit could have been brought in Mississippi against all of the corporate defendants, as such defendants were transacting business in that State within the meaning of the abovementioned statute.
The question as to whether defendant Asphalt...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting Sign on now to see your case. Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
Updated daily.
Uncompromising quality.
Complete, Accurate, Current.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full
text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the
full text of the citing case.
